The researchers discovered that two particular proteins appear to degrade health in worms and mice by harming mitochondria. Worms, mice, and humans all produce these proteins in increasing amounts as they age. The researchers improved the health of aging worms and mice by suppressing the proteins. They found reason to believe this might also be possible for humans.
I think posts "without content" such as simple +1s or thank yous are not liked here, because they don't add much to the conversation. Still, I found the summary exceptionally useful and wanted to thank the guy/gal.
That healthspan might be extended along with lifespan is tremendous news. I think people are afraid of living longer than 75 or so because they assume that the rest of their life will be a spent in senility. But if we can figure out how to keep minds and bodies useful as long as a person lives by influencing their epigenetics, we could make people productive and happy for decades longer.
If anyone want to know the heads or tails of this, read the book 'Lifespan' by David Sinclair. It has good explanations and awesome research findings on ageing like this study.
Does anyone know what the implication for humans is? Do we know what might be activating these epigenetic regulators in humans and how we can reverse them?
He also eats NMN, resveratrol and metformin (not for diabetes, but for anti-aging). He talks about these measures that he takes and the research he uses to motivate them in his podcast with Joe Rogan (can be found by "Joe Rogan David Sinclair"). The research is not as conclusive yet as to be fully agreed on upon everyone after rigorous testing up to WHO standards, but it is solid enough for this researcher (in the field of aging no less) to consider these measures valuable.
They use wishful thinking. Body composition scales are crap, don't trust their numbers. Most just run a little current through your legs and then guess some numbers. The error bars on that are so huge that it's basically meaningless to compare between people. The have limited utility for comparing your body composition to your past self.
I'm not sure what TFA's talking about wrt scales showing someone's age as being 1/3 what it actually is -- but the claim:
> They use wishful thinking. Body composition scales are crap, don't trust their numbers.
... is difficult to assimilate.
I use Omron consumer-grade gear - all the in-depth reviews / assessments I've seen suggest it's reasonably accurate (unquote) so long as you're not an outlier (massively overweight, underweight, overly muscular, under/over-hydrated). But in all cases it's great as a trending tool.
I agree smart scales have a massive margin of error for BMI, muscle weight, water %, etc..
That said, they are useful when used on a daily basis over many months. Clear trends show up accurately (I started using a Withings scale 8 months ago and have lost 30lbs in that period, no single measurement is useful and they often swing wildly up and down, but the trend lines over time are what I found valuable, and as accurate as needed, at least for my purposes)
